[Pols-l] changed language

[Haider-Markel, Donald Patrick]

Colleagues, below I've highlighted the proposed new language for the Annual Evaluation Process; I've placed it within a section of the document so you can see how it would fit in. I'd like to approve some version of this on Friday.
Thanks

Revised language for Faculty Evaluation Plan, Department of Political Science

Approved 16

Annual Evaluation System
A.  Overview
In response to a call issued by the department chair in December of each year, each faculty member submits a formatted report on the previous calendar year's activity (see attached Appendix B<http://policy.ku.edu/CLAS/faculty-evaluation-plan-political-science#appendixb>). The completed report along with required portfolio items is due on the deadline date specified in the department chair's call - typically no later than early March.
These reports are combined with student evaluations to form a dossier for each faculty member. On the basis of materials submitted, each member of the Advisory Committee evaluates every faculty member on the scale above. Teaching and service are considered on the basis of calendar year activities, while research is viewed from a three-year calendar perspective.
Evaluation of faculty members who have been on leave for the period under review: Faculty members whose approved leave takes them away from making normal contributions in teaching/advising, research, or service can have the normal 40-40-20 weighting of teaching, research, and service renegotiated with the chair when they request leave to request the kinds of work that they will be doing while on leave. For faculty members who are on leave without pay for health or family reasons and not performing any University responsibilities, an evaluation is not expected and normally no merit would be given.
B.  Portfolio Preparation
NOTE: Faculty are responsible for annually maintaining their PRO record, which is also accessed by administration for reports such as the College snapshot of departmental productivity. PRO provides an annual activity report and faculty are advised to view and update their PRO reports before submission of the faculty member's portfolio to the unit. In classifying your work as major and minor, please bear in mind the definitions in the unit's Promotion and Tenure Guidelines.<http://policy.ku.edu/CLAS/promotion-tenure-political-science>
Each faculty member submits the following material to the Advisory Committee: 1) the Faculty Annual Report (to see the required categories and multiple sources of data to document teaching/advising, research and service, see Faculty Annual Report); 2) a current curriculum vitae; 3) two most immediate past annual reports (to assess the three-year research component of the ratings); 4) all student evaluations (from the department); 5) syllabi, examinations and other relevant materials from courses; 6) peer evaluations of teaching; 7) all research and writing; 8) letters of acceptance of manuscripts or grant requests; 9) reviews of manuscripts and grant proposals; and 10) all letters, reports, and other materials relating to service.
C.  Portfolio Review and Evaluation
At a special meeting of the Advisory Committee held in late March or early April, committee members present and discuss their rating of each faculty member.
These ratings are based on the information in the faculty member's portfolio and on the quantity, quality (level of journal/publisher, value of learning generated in a course), significance and impact (especially the generation of citations, funding, and student teaching awards) of teaching/advising, research, and service. A score is assigned for each faculty member in the areas of teaching, research, and service by taking the mean of the final ratings of the committee members. At the appropriate call for the awarding of merit, the chair uses the committee scores to compute a weighted overall rating for each faculty member by the following formula: Overall merit = 2(teaching/advising rating) + 2(research rating) + (service rating) / 5.

Post Tenure Review and Integration into the Annual Evaluation Process
For faculty undergoing a post-tenure review in given year, the post tenure review process should be followed by the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee (see http://policy.ku.edu/CLAS/post-tenure-review-political-science). The Promotion and Tenure Committee will share the results of the post tenure review assessment with the Advisory Committee so that the Advisory Committee's annual evaluation of the faculty member will be informed by the results of the post tenure review assessment.

D. Annual Evaluation Feedback Process
The chair informs each faculty member of his or her Advisory Committee evaluation ratings through a written statement of evaluation made available no later than May 1. This letter consists of qualitative assessments of the strengths and weaknesses of the faculty member in the areas of teaching/advising, research and service. Each faculty member is invited to discuss the evaluation with the chair and/or with members of the Advisory Committee. A copy of the written evaluation is maintained in the faculty member's personnel file.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ku.edu/pipermail/pols-l/attachments/20161027/ab058426/attachment.html>